Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

On this day in 1981 Bobby Sands began his Hunger Strike

13»

Comments

  • #102
    rockatansky
    Registered Users Posts: 1,337 ✭✭✭rockatansky


    ChicagoJoe wrote: »
    Who the f**k were they :D:D

    Jesus Are you for real???


  • #103
    rockatansky
    Registered Users Posts: 1,337 ✭✭✭rockatansky


    pedroeibar1 wrote: »
    Your comment illustrates the twisted ‘logic’ of some supposedly Republican individuals. Supposedly Republican because they have no idea of what Republicanism is about, nor yet democracy.

    If I suffer from such twisted logic with regards to Republicanism and Democracy, please do tell how a Catholic man of 19 years of age in 1969 Ulster should have handled having no right to a job, no right to a home, no right to vote and no right to an education. Not only having a community hating him and his family and buring them out of their family home purely because of his religion, but also has to deal with a Police Force who's main objective was to secure the Protestant State for its Protestant People. Seeing as you are the one with all of the logic of Reublicanism and Democracy, do tell what was the correct way for him and every other man and woman in his positon to handle this situation?

    I am not in any way saying that any of the above reasons justify the Warrington bombings . I could go on an on for a very long time about how many acts of sheer madness and utter stupidity that were carried out by the IRA, be it bombs in shopping Centres, Restuarants, Proxy Bombs etc....when Civilians were the targets it was Murder, no excuses. Some of their actions have done irreparable damage to the Republican Movement.

    However at the end it was the state created by the British Goverment for the Protestant people of Ulster that is responsible for the troubles. As a resident of the South I would never have condemned anyone in that situation for taking up arms, because i believe I would have done the same if I was left in that situation.

    You obvioulsy believe that the Catholic Population had no right to defend themselves against this, therefore can you please tell how this true Republicanism or Democracy should have handled this for the better of the Catholic Population??
    pedroeibar1 wrote: »
    It is inaccurate because at no time did I suggest that Sands was responsible for Omagh, he was dead almost two decades when that happened, an atrocity where twenty-nine people died and more than 200 were injured. All of them innocent.

    There is absolutely no reason whatsoever to mention the Omagh Boming on a Thread about Bobby Sands, yet you've done it twice so far. Its blantantly obvious why you have and it is not going to work.
    pedroeibar1 wrote: »

    Even today Sinn Fein will never condemn any past IRA action, murder, bombing, atrocity, disappearance, whatever because in their twisted logic it would be ‘dishonourable’ to the ‘sacred memories’ of their ‘martyrs’. The real reason is that they are too cowardly to say anything negative because of a fear of losing a few votes from a rabid, tiny minority.


    Sinn Fein will never condemn any actions ever carried out by The Provisional IRA and it is absoutely right that they never do. If you are waiting for this to happen then I can save you some time and don't because its never going to happen.

    pedroeibar1 wrote: »

    The real reason is that they are too cowardly to say anything negative because of a fear of losing a few votes from a rabid, tiny minority.

    Have to laugh at this one. Sinn Fein are on course to become the largest Political Party in Northern Ireland. The DUP are starting to come apart without Paisley, Peter Robinson isnt even an MP. Many on boards were adamant that Gerry Adams didn't stand a chance of getting elected to the Dail. Then Suprise suprise, tops the Poll. So again your 'Tiny Minority' comment is just wrong.

    Its not about ' ‘dishonourable’ to the ‘sacred memories’, where you got this from I dont know. Its about Sinn Fein Leading both the Republican and Nationalist Communities forward in this process and into the future. Families from both Communities who have both given and lost so much to the the movement Sinn Fein claim to Lead. Any you expect Sinn Feing to apologies for this? Can you honestly really not see why they cant and wont do it??

    If it did happen, the only people who would benifit would be the dissident movement. They would be the only winner in all of this, no one else. To think otherwise is kidding yourself.

    pedroeibar1 wrote: »

    We are more than 80 posts into this thread and not one Sands supporter has provided a valid suggestion to back up the views in the opening post. (In case you’ve forgotten it, it was the nonsensical ‘How this country could do with Bobby Sands today, the time is coming that we will soon hear the laughter of our children.

    I cant answer that question, I have no idea how Bobby Sands would do today. I think its fair to say that nobody can. To many in the Rebublican movement led the charge that stood up to Magaret Thatchers Governemnt and paid the ultimate price for it. If you dont think thats admirable then thats fine. We're not here to try and change your mind.


  • #104
    rockatansky
    Registered Users Posts: 1,337 ✭✭✭rockatansky


    Jawgap wrote: »

    And apparently "At the time of Nelson Mandela’s death, Russia Today, compared the ANC leader with Bobby Sands."

    Both Leaders of an Armed Political struggle and a Group of Political Prisoners. Both Elected to Government. The ANC and Sinn Fein have very close links. Gerry Adams attended both of their funerals.


    They're not far off it.


  • #105
    rockatansky
    Registered Users Posts: 1,337 ✭✭✭rockatansky


    Santa Cruz wrote: »
    Don't forget all the participants in Operation Transformation who got such inspiration from his weight loss

    Hilarious, I'm guessing by how old that joke is that you didn't make it up yourself??


  • #106
    rockatansky
    Registered Users Posts: 1,337 ✭✭✭rockatansky


    pedroeibar1 wrote: »
    many of those historically closely associated with him are RIRA thugs. Not that I expect an erudite, or even straightforward honest answer......

    Sorry, Have you clarified who the 'Many' are who were closely associated with him who are now RIRA thugs??


  • #107
    Jawgap
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,297 ✭✭✭✭Jawgap


    rockatansky wrote: »
    Both Leaders of an Armed Political struggle and a Group of Political Prisoners. Both Elected to Government. The ANC and Sinn Fein have very close links. Gerry Adams attended both of their funerals.


    They're not far off it.

    Makes you wonder why only Russia Today - the pro-Putin mouthpiece - picked up on it.

    If that's the peg on which Sands historical significance is being hung, then it's an insubstantial cloak of importance.....


  • #108
    pedroeibar1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,108 ✭✭✭pedroeibar1


    rockatansky wrote: »
    I cant answer that question, I have no idea how Bobby Sands would do today. I think its fair to say that nobody can..

    So, we are finally approaching an answer to the OP question and claims. About time.


  • #109
    rockatansky
    Registered Users Posts: 1,337 ✭✭✭rockatansky


    Jawgap wrote: »
    Makes you wonder why only Russia Today - the pro-Putin mouthpiece - picked up on it.

    If that's the peg on which Sands historical significance is being hung, then it's an insubstantial cloak of importance.....

    Here's a suggestion, Instead of relying on others to make comparisons for you, why don't you try researching both yourself and come to your own conclusions.


  • #110
    rockatansky
    Registered Users Posts: 1,337 ✭✭✭rockatansky


    pedroeibar1 wrote: »
    So, we are finally approaching an answer to the OP question and claims. About time.

    No 'finally' about it. Here's my answer that I gave on page one of this thread, it's effectively what I've said in my most recent post:

    rockatansky wrote: »

    I don't believe that anybody who takes such course of action (hunger strike) can be 'hero worshiped'. I do believe he and all the others who participated in the blanket and Hunger strikes showed a strength and determination that can only be admired by those who find themselves in a similar situation.

    Now that I've cleared that up for you, is it possible you could provide more information on the 'many' who are now RIRA thugs??


  • #111
    rockatansky
    Registered Users Posts: 1,337 ✭✭✭rockatansky


    rockatansky wrote: »
    No 'finally' about it. Here's my answer that I gave on page one of this thread, it's effectively what I've said in my most recent post:




    Now that I've cleared that up for you, is it possible you could provide more information on the 'many' who are now RIRA thugs??

    Also, would it be possible to address the point regarding 'twisted' Republicans and their views on Democracy also?


  • Advertisement
  • #112
    Jawgap
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,297 ✭✭✭✭Jawgap


    rockatansky wrote: »
    Here's a suggestion, Instead of relying on others to make comparisons for you, why don't you try researching both yourself and come to your own conclusions.

    To be honest I got it from the Bobby Sands Trust website......

    http://www.bobbysandstrust.com/archives/category/news

    I was just parroting what they were saying about him...........


  • #113
    rockatansky
    Registered Users Posts: 1,337 ✭✭✭rockatansky


    Jawgap wrote: »
    To be honest I got it from the Bobby Sands Trust website......

    http://www.bobbysandstrust.com/archives/category/news

    I was just parroting what they were saying about him...........

    Maybe I misunderstood you, is your issue with the comparison made between Sands and Mandela or that it was it that was made by the RT News Agency? In which case is it really relavent who made it. It's either right or wrong?


  • #114
    con___manx1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,523 ✭✭✭con___manx1


    On the first day of Bobby's hunger strike he writes in his diary of the last meal . He writes the irony of it contain an orange and yes it tasted very bitter ; )


  • #115
    Jawgap
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,297 ✭✭✭✭Jawgap


    rockatansky wrote: »
    Maybe I misunderstood you, is your issue with the comparison made between Sands and Mandela or that it was it that was made by the RT News Agency? In which case is it really relavent who made it. It's either right or wrong?

    My point has nothing to do with either. I'll spell it out a bit clearer......

    I assume that the Bobby Sands Trust website is the 'one stop shop' for all, or certainly, the bulk of information about him?

    It was what would have been his 60th birthday recently.

    Normally when such significant dates occur for historically relevant figures there are events - for example, conferences discussing their impact, essays or articles in specialist journals and mainstream media, perhaps a documentary, maybe a re-showing of a film if one was made about them etc etc etc

    In this case, for Sands, the Trust website seems to have missed out on chronicling the events or maybe they didn't happen? The site mentions:

    .....an article published in a British newspaper discussing a film loosely based on Sands' life (which was largely financed by a corporation in the ownership of the British government)

    .....the award last year of some Italian literature prize to someone who wrote a book about him

    .....a brief statement by Christy Moore

    .....a SOCCER game in San Diego - not a Gaelic football or hurling match or even a mini-tournament, but a 6 on 6 indoor soccer game - if they had 12 players why not have a handball competition instead?

    So, maybe I'm missing something, but out of that list which one suggests that Sands was a historical figure?

    The point about the Russia Today comparison is straightforward - only Russia Today made that comparison. One news agency, in one country? In all the coverage of Mandela's death and funeral, all the tributes that must have been written.......the profiles.......the obituaries.......the articles discussing every aspect of his life........and only one news agency in one sentence mentions Sands? And you and the OP still reckon Sands was historically relevant, and internationally respected???


  • #116
    Jawgap
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,297 ✭✭✭✭Jawgap


    Found the Russia Today piece.......

    http://rt.com/op-edge/ireland-human-rights-defender-998/

    It ends with the following disclaimer......
    The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.

    So even Putin's mouthpiece doesn't editorially accept the comparison......


  • #117
    jonniebgood1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,578 ✭✭✭jonniebgood1


    jonniebgood1 wrote: »
    Totally irrelevant and unproveable links/ comparisons between victims of both sides are not helpful.
    pedroeibar1 wrote: »
    I completely disagree with your comment which is grossly inaccurate in the context of FF's earlier post.

    Twenty one years ago (almost to the day) a provable act of terrorism – the planting of 2 bombs in a busy shopping street killed two innocent small boys (Jonathan Ball and Tim Parry) and injured about 60 innocent people. That event led to the creation of a Foundation to support victims and veterans of conflict and terrorism and to help them move on with their lives. It also works to build communities without prejudice and discrimination.

    It is irrelevant to the OP.
    There is no link between this tragedy and the main topic in this thread. There are tragedies on both sides and this is what I refer to when I advise against "unproveable links/ comparisons between victims of both sides". For example do we compare the victims of Bloody Sunday with those of Warrington or Manchester. Fred linked this tragedy to Bobby sands which is a ridiculous and unproveable link. Can that ever be factually proven? of course not. So while listing details as you have above as an extension of Freds point may be seen as empathetic it can be of no assistance to the threads topic, rather it helps those who have been asking for the thread to be closed down in their aim.
    pedroeibar1 wrote: »
    Why then in your view is it not helpful to ask what has the PIRA done since then to justify no comparison being made with their 'work' and the achievements of the Tim Parry & Jonathan Ball Foundation for Peace? .
    You are making the discussion absurd.
    Why not ask similar questions regarding Thatcher not allowing prisoners the rights they wanted as against the IRA prisoners work in peace partnership in the 1990's and 2000's?

    The answer is that it would be an irrelevant link, nothing to do with this thread, perhaps spurious in an attempt to derail thread, etc.

    In looking at the last part of the thread this seems to have been successful which seems to support my initial point about not being helpful, which has been ignored.


  • #118
    Fratton Fred
    Closed Accounts Posts: 26,567 ✭✭✭✭Fratton Fred


    A claim was made that Bobby Sands helped pave the way for the peace talks, I simply refuted that claim by using a more likely scenario.

    Post Eniskillen, support for an armed campaign was on the decline. The second Warrington bomb all but killed it off, hence the ira had little choice but to discuss a cease fire.

    As I said, the murders of Jonathan Ball and Tim Parry is much more significant in terms of the peace process.


  • #119
    rockatansky
    Registered Users Posts: 1,337 ✭✭✭rockatansky


    Fratton Fred wrote: »
    A claim was made that Bobby Sands helped pave the way for the peace talks, I simply refuted that claim by using a more likely scenario..

    Bobby Sands (along with the other hunger strikers) running for and winning a seat in the Westminster elections (and Dail) strengthened the position of those in the Republican Community that believed it was vital that a strong Political base was maintained and grown in strength in parallel with the military wing. It helped solidify Gerry Adams position that would in future enable him to bring the vast majority of the Republican movement along with him and Sinn Fein during the Good Friday Negotiations and avoid a big split in the movement.

    Their actions played a much bigger part than the fallout of the Warrington Bombings in terms of the Peace Process.


  • #120
    marienbad
    Registered Users Posts: 9,463 ✭✭✭marienbad


    rockatansky wrote: »
    Bobby Sands (along with the other hunger strikers) running for and winning a seat in the Westminster elections (and Dail) strengthened the position of those in the Republican Community that believed it was vital that a strong Political base was maintained and grown in strength in parallel with the military wing. It helped solidify Gerry Adams position that would enable him to bring the vast majority of the Republican movement along with him and Sinn Fein during the Good Friday Negotiations.

    Their actions played a much bigger part than the fallout of the Warrington Bombings in terms of the Peace Process.

    How do you measure that ?


  • Advertisement
  • #121
    rockatansky
    Registered Users Posts: 1,337 ✭✭✭rockatansky


    marienbad wrote: »
    How do you measure that ?

    By Gerry Adams and Martin Mcguinness serving as MLA's and Ministers in the Power Sharing executive. All other political leaders from the past 30 years North, South and in the UK have fallen by the wayside (With the exception of Peter Robinson, but lets be honest he's not exactly on stabr ground is he). They are left standing.

    The IRA decommissioning of their arsenal again without any major split in the ranks. Sinn Feins continued political growth where they stand a very good chance of being the largest party in the 6 counties, as well as potentially being the largest party in opposition in the South.


  • #122
    marienbad
    Registered Users Posts: 9,463 ✭✭✭marienbad


    rockatansky wrote: »
    By Gerry Adams and Martin Mcguinness serving as MLA's and Ministers in the Power Sharing executive. All other political leaders from the past 30 years North, South and in the UK have fallen by the wayside (With the exception of Peter Robinson, but lets be honest he's not exactly on stabr ground is he). They are left standing.

    The IRA decommissioning of their arsenal again without any major split in the ranks. Sinn Feins continued political growth where they stand a very good chance of being the largest party in the 6 counties, as well as potentially being the largest party in opposition in the South.


    That is not answering what I asked though , how can you attribute the above to Bobby Sands and not the death of the two boys or possibly even both ?


  • #123
    rockatansky
    Registered Users Posts: 1,337 ✭✭✭rockatansky


    marienbad wrote: »
    That is not answering what I asked though , how can you attribute the above to Bobby Sands and not the death of the two boys or possibly even both ?

    I'm sorry but I believe that my first paragraph clearly answers your question

    Bobby Sands (along with the other hunger strikers) running for and winning a seat in the Westminster elections (and Dail) strengthened the position of those in the Republican Community that believed it was vital that a strong Political base was maintained and grown in strength in parallel with the military wing. It helped solidify Gerry Adams position that would enable him to bring the vast majority of the Republican movement along with him and Sinn Fein during the Good Friday Negotiations.


    Without this realisation of the political support that existed and that became evident through the hunger strikes and eventual election wins, the positions of Adams would have been alot weaker when coming up against those in his own community who rejected the political path as a viable option. You would have had different leaders emerging which would have caused larger splits and many different groups, as is clearly evident with Loyalism and its current lack of political leadership.


  • #124
    marienbad
    Registered Users Posts: 9,463 ✭✭✭marienbad


    rockatansky wrote: »
    I'm sorry but I believe that my first paragraph clearly answers your question

    Bobby Sands (along with the other hunger strikers) running for and winning a seat in the Westminster elections (and Dail) strengthened the position of those in the Republican Community that believed it was vital that a strong Political base was maintained and grown in strength in parallel with the military wing. It helped solidify Gerry Adams position that would enable him to bring the vast majority of the Republican movement along with him and Sinn Fein during the Good Friday Negotiations.


    Without this realisation of the political support that existed and that became evident through the hunger strikes and eventual election wins, the positions of Adams would have been alot weaker when coming up against those in his own community who rejected the political path as a viable option. You would have had different leaders emerging which would have caused larger splits and many different groups, as is clearly evident with Loyalism.

    That is just opinion though - looking at what happened and then saying why you think it happened .

    Remember your statement was ''their actions played a much bigger part ....''


  • #125
    rockatansky
    Registered Users Posts: 1,337 ✭✭✭rockatansky


    marienbad wrote: »
    That is just opinion though - looking at what happened and then saying why you think it happened .

    Remember your statement was ''their actions played a much bigger part ....''

    Sorry but which part is just my opinion? Can you point out where you feel I am wrong?


  • #126
    marienbad
    Registered Users Posts: 9,463 ✭✭✭marienbad


    rockatansky wrote: »
    Sorry but which part is just my opinion? Can you point out where you feel I am wrong?

    Your statement was this

    ''Their actions played a much bigger part than the fallout of the Warrington Bombings in terms of the Peace Process''

    I asked how did you measure that , reciting what actually happened is not answering what I asked .


  • Advertisement
  • #127
    rockatansky
    Registered Users Posts: 1,337 ✭✭✭rockatansky


    marienbad wrote: »
    Your statement was this

    ''Their actions played a much bigger part than the fallout of the Warrington Bombings in terms of the Peace Process''

    I asked how did you measure that , reciting what actually happened is not answering what I asked .

    And I clearly answered you how I measured that, by current position and growing strength of the Provisional Leadership??


  • #128
    marienbad
    Registered Users Posts: 9,463 ✭✭✭marienbad


    rockatansky wrote: »
    And I clearly answered you how I measured that, by current position and growing strength of the Provisional Leadership??

    That is not an answer. You pick an episode in history, lets say x, and state it caused y, and give no reason for it.

    Life and history is not that simple .


  • #129
    rockatansky
    Registered Users Posts: 1,337 ✭✭✭rockatansky


    marienbad wrote: »
    That is not an answer. You pick an episode in history, lets say x, and state it caused y, and give no reason for it.

    Life and history is not that simple .

    I'm sorry but now you've lost me.

    Episode X - Bobby Sands leads a group of prisoners on hunger strike. During this hunger strike he is elected to Westminster. He dies shortly after.

    Y - This Caused - Upon realising the success of this election and the subsequent election of Sands Election Agent to the same seat after his death, this caused The leader ship of Sinn Fein to embark on a strategy known as the armalite and ballot box strategy:

    http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armalite_and_ballot_box_strategy

    Do I need to go on further or am I wasting my time?


  • #130
    marienbad
    Registered Users Posts: 9,463 ✭✭✭marienbad


    rockatansky wrote: »
    I'm sorry but now you've lost me.

    Episode X - Bobby Sands leads a group of prisoners on hunger strike. During this hunger strike he is elected to Westminster. He dies shortly after.

    Y - This Caused - Upon realising the success of this election and the subsequent election of Sands Election Agent to the same seat after his death, this caused The leader ship of Sinn Fein to embark on a strategy known as the armalite and ballot box strategy:

    http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armalite_and_ballot_box_strategy

    Do I need to go on further or am I wasting my time?

    Your wasting your time . As I say life is not that simple


  • #131
    Jawgap
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,297 ✭✭✭✭Jawgap


    Sands, McCarron et al ran as 'Anti-H Block' candidates not as SF candidates. Their candidacy was co-ordinated through the 'National H-Block/Armagh Committee.' They advocated that a "campaign on Sands' behalf "ought to be a single issue effort around the theme of special status for all political prisoners with no party labels to be affixed to his candidacy."

    In the case of Sands, as the first candidate to go forward, SF were worried he would fail and fail miserably, hence the desire to keep some distance between him and them.

    In the end he won, primarily because the vote was a reaction to what was happening, rather than an endorsement of it. He was hugely helped by the fact that the SDLP and the previous incumbent's brother pulled out leaving him in a two-horse contest with a unionist candidate - I'd imagine at the time that most nationalists, in those circumstances, given the choice between a unionist and someone who is not a unionist, would have gone with the someone who is not a unionist.

    After McCarron, Ken Maginnis took the seat in the 1983 general election and held it for 18 years.

    In essence Sands etc were single issue candidates, like those TDs who occasionally get elected because someone closed the local hospital. As soon as the issue resolved them and their ilk were consigned to oblivion.

    Incidentally, the adoption of the "Armalite and the Ballot Box" strategy wasn't driven by the success of Sands election - it was driven by the failure of the hunger strike. Sands election confirmed that an electoral strategy was viable, but the actual decision to adopt it was driven by a range of factors, the defining one being the failure of the hunger strike and the recognition that the British were prepared to sustain a significant military commitment over the long term.

    The failure of the hunger strike, in effect, forced the PIRA to realise they would never achieve a military victory.

    From Ian McAllister, ‘The Armalite and the ballot box’: Sinn Fein’s electoral strategy in Northern Ireland' Electoral Studies 23 (2004) 123–142
    The first prisoner to refuse food, Bobby Sands, was elected to Westminster in April 1981 and two other hunger strikers were elected to the Dail shortly after. When Sands died in June, his funeral attracted massive publicity; in all, 10 men died as a result of the hunger strikers.

    While the hunger strikes had generated much public sympathy across Ireland and America, it had not furthered IRA’s goals and had confirmed the view of many of the new generation of IRA leaders that Britain would not withdraw from Northern Ireland in response solely to a military campaign

    That led to realisation that an 'integrated' political and military strategy was required.


  • Advertisement
  • #132
    pedroeibar1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,108 ✭✭✭pedroeibar1


    jonniebgood1 wrote: »
    It is irrelevant to the OP.
    There is no link between this tragedy and the main topic in this thread. There are tragedies on both sides and this is what I refer to when I advise against "unproveable links/ comparisons between victims of both sides". For example do we compare the victims of Bloody Sunday with those of Warrington or Manchester. Fred linked this tragedy to Bobby sands which is a ridiculous and unproveable link. Can that ever be factually proven? of course not. So while listing details as you have above as an extension of Freds point may be seen as empathetic it can be of no assistance to the threads topic, rather it helps those who have been asking for the thread to be closed down in their aim.

    You are making the discussion absurd.
    Why not ask similar questions regarding Thatcher not allowing prisoners the rights they wanted as against the IRA prisoners work in peace partnership in the 1990's and 2000's?

    The answer is that it would be an irrelevant link, nothing to do with this thread, perhaps spurious in an attempt to derail thread, etc.

    In looking at the last part of the thread this seems to have been successful which seems to support my initial point about not being helpful, which has been ignored.

    JBG,
    It is difficult for me to understand how you arrived at your interpretation of what was written by Fred (quote – “Jonathan Ball and Tim Parry played a bigger part in the peace process. The ira bombed themselves in to an untenable position .....The difference being, thanks to the likes of Bobby Sands, they had no say in the matter.”)
    From my perspective – and from that of any logical viewer – the clear inference from Fred’s comment is that unlike the actions of Sands the two innocent boys had no control over what happened to them. Their deaths, the culmination of a bombing campaign that was abhorred by the vast majority in the South, created a huge negative impact on public perception of the IRA. It found itself in a lose lose situation.
    Nor did I make any attempt, spurious or otherwise, to derail the thread – in fact I repeatedly asked a question of the OP and others to give some example to substantiate their claims. At no time did I mention Bloody Sunday – if you read back over my posts you will see that I wrote of the frustration of the ‘ordinary Southerner’ over the British Government’s mishandling of affairs in N. Irl. and playing into the hands of the IRA. (Widgery, although not mentioned by me is a typical example.)

    More recently there has been more off-topic waffle on the electioneering ‘success’ of Sands & Co., which is both inaccurate (unless 2 out of 12 is mathematically counts as success!) and repetitive as has been rebutted by Jawgap and pointed out by me earlier

    As for your suggestion that I’m making the discussion absurd, I’d suggest that the opening post already was absurd and subsequent posts by several others brought it out of that level. The OP has not posted on ‘his’ thread for 11 days, has failed miserably to substantiate his stupid claims yet has seen fit to post comments on football and other matters. That suggests that he has run off, tail between legs.

    I’m out of this thread, it was absurd.


Advertisement